topic Re: wrong wall area in schedules in Collaboration with other software

wrong wall area in schedules

Anonymous — Tue, 21 Aug 2018 11:17:12 GMT

Hi, I've got a big problem with schedules, both in Archicad 20 and 21. When scheduling walls I use inside and outside gross and conditional surfaces but I can't understand how the hell do they work! Why External and internal surfaces are identical (supposing I'm measuring a rectangle this is not possible!)? Why then if I have no holes at all, gross and conditional (or net) are different? It seams that for conditional it is not considering angles, but what I expect is that that must be the difference between inside and outside. Well, It's a huge problem, so please help me!!!!

Thank's to everybody!!!
Have a nice summer!

Re: wrong wall area in schedules

Laszlo Nagy — Tue, 21 Aug 2018 12:46:30 GMT

Here are all Wall Listing Parameters and how they are calculated:

https://helpcenter.graphisoft.com/user-guide/76908/

Re: wrong wall area in schedules

Anonymous — Tue, 21 Aug 2018 13:42:56 GMT

yes, but the problem is that the behaviour is completely different.... For example, for "Gross Surface Area of the wall on the Outside Face" and "Gross Surface Area of the wall on the Inside Face" I get the point of what they should do, in fact I espect them to be different while they are identical...

Re: wrong wall area in schedules

Gaetano — Fri, 22 May 2020 16:37:56 GMT

a.forlin wrote:
yes, but the problem is that the behaviour is completely different.... For example, for "Gross Surface Area of the wall on the Outside Face" and "Gross Surface Area of the wall on the Inside Face" I get the point of what they should do, in fact I espect them to be different while they are identical...

I've got the same problem!!!!

Re: wrong wall area in schedules

Laszlo Nagy — Fri, 22 May 2020 17:19:56 GMT

Gaetano,

Can you show me some screenshots? Like how the geometry of the Wall looks in 3D (just a single Wall), and then how those values appear on the Schedule?

Re: wrong wall area in schedules

Gaetano — Fri, 05 Jun 2020 09:21:34 GMT

LaszloNagy wrote:
Gaetano,

Can you show me some screenshots? Like how the geometry of the Wall looks in 3D (just a single Wall), and then how those values appear on the Schedule?

Hi LaszloNagy! Thank you for answering.
I am Italian and I know very little English, so I apologize in advance for the mistakes.

I am only now beginning to discover the schedules and my desire is to extrapolate the data of the individual layers of a composite wall:
1. Layer length;
2. Layer thickness;
3. Layer height;
4. Surface (m2) of at least one of the two faces of a layer;
5. Layer volume.

After replying to the topic "wrong wall area in schedules" I managed to get only:
2. Layer thickness;
4. Surface (m2) of at least one of the two faces of a layer (img.1);
5. Layer volume (img. 1).

I can't understand how, if possible, to obtain quantities 1 and 3

I would like to have the possibility to view all the quantities (from 1 to 5).

Another BIG problem I had when I tried to quantify two walls, of the same type, same length and same height but, consecutive (img. 2).
I noticed that the quantities, which I learned to extrapolate, are not identical for both composite wall.
How is it possible????

N.B.
To better visualize the data I put the two composite walls composed on two different Layers.

The building package that I created does not have real functionality, but was created just for experimentation.

I hope I have been clear and that you can help me

Thanks

Re: wrong wall area in schedules

Marc H — Sat, 06 Jun 2020 19:12:58 GMT

The intersecting materials may calculate differently as we can expect AC will prioritize each of the layered materials as they meet at the corner, much as one would build the walls. They would not be equal unless the materials were mitered at the corner.

Re: wrong wall area in schedules

Gaetano — Sun, 07 Jun 2020 10:30:16 GMT

Marc wrote:
The intersecting materials may calculate differently as we can expect AC will prioritize each of the layered materials as they meet at the corner, much as one would build the walls. They would not be equal unless the materials were mitered at the corner.

Sorry but my english is bad, so I struggle to understand what you wrote ....
cit. "They would not be equal unless the materials were mitered at the corner" ...
...so the layers won't be cut diagonally, will they meet only orthogonally?
If so, then will I never be able to verify the individual quantities of the layers, of consecutive composite walls ???!!!???

Re: wrong wall area in schedules

Laszlo Nagy — Sun, 07 Jun 2020 11:15:22 GMT

I do not think there are any available Schedule Fields that can return those skin length and skin height values you are looking for. I think this is a limitation of the software, these capabilities are not implemented in it.

The reason you see different values is that Wall skins intersect based on the Intersection Priority Number of their Building Materials, and one Wall cuts the other. If you select either Wall you can see from its highlight how its 3D body is generated. You can also see it if you display only one of the Walls in 3D.

Sorry, I cannot be of help here, I don't know any way to get those values.

Re: wrong wall area in schedules

Marc H — Sun, 07 Jun 2020 23:15:18 GMT

@Gaetano,
The builders will not miter most most materials and instead square cut and layer, so your calculations will be accurately quantified.

For mitered materials (e.g., some stone detailing, veneers, etc.), perhaps you can use a separate simple wall for that outer material in those locations, which may be mitered. Here is a test miter example done with a 1/2" wall with high priority over the concrete and then an SEO to miter them, resulting in miter depiction and equal schedule values.

Re: wrong wall area in schedules

Gaetano — Mon, 06 Jul 2020 09:29:14 GMT

Thanks a lot to LaszloNagy and Marc H for the support and for answering my questions!
For LaszloNagy: looking at how the 3d body is generated, I was able to verify the correctness of the measurements and values I sought! I don't think the differences in values between the layers of the two composite walls, in my case, depended on the priority number of the intersection of their building materials because the two composite walls were made with the same materials and therefore had the same properties as intersection....
For Marc H: ... actually I have experienced that, between the two composite walls, the one with the layers of greatest surface and volume turns out to be the wall traced first, regardless of the direction of tracing !!! ...and yes! the diagonal cut would be unrealistic so I'm glad Archicad reasons as it does.
The really strange thing is the impossibility of pulling out the length and height of the various layers, because I think these data are already kept inside the drawing and it would be right for the programmers to bring them to light!
Thanks again, I hope I won't have to disturb you again, but I fear it will happen!